ADVERTISEMENT

Opinion: Liz Cheney has some tough calls to make

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,127
58,304
113
Opinion by
Jennifer Rubin
Columnist
Today at 12:00 p.m. EDT



Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) has staked her political career on the belief that there is a viable Republican Party to be rescued, one that rejects the disgraced former president but offers an alternative to Democratic policies. Her rhetoric is impassioned — but leaves some open questions.

Cheney has bitterly criticized House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), most recently in a “60 Minutes" interview with Lesley Stahl. “What he’s done is embrace Donald Trump. And if I were doing what he’s doing, I would be deeply ashamed of myself,” Cheney said. “I don’t know how you explain that to your children. When you are in a situation where you have somebody who did what Donald Trump did, it is absolutely clear he cannot continue to be somebody you embrace.” She added that “there’s a difference between somebody who voted for Donald Trump and being the Republican leader after an insurrection, and setting all of that aside and going to Mar-a-Lago, and rehabilitating him, bringing him back in.” She reiterated: “That, to me, is unforgivable.”
But McCarthy almost certainly will be speaker if Republicans win the House. Could Cheney support him in good conscience? Would she refuse to vote for him if the decision resulted in a Democratic speaker? If electing a House majority means turning the House over to Trump’s puppet, then patriotic, pro-democracy Americans should make certain the House remains in Democratic hands.



These questions are not academic. Cheney should think long and hard about campaigning for other Republicans in swing seats, where Republican victories might guarantee an unfit speaker who would do Trump’s bidding. In other words, so long as the GOP is under Trump’s spell, support for other Republicans seems at best counterproductive for democracy defenders and at worst detrimental to the fate of democracy. How does Cheney address that conundrum?
She also explained in the interview that she voted for Trump in 2016 because she supported his policies. But was that a mistake? He capitulated to the Taliban (a move she denounced and which she says endangered the United States). He abandoned the Kurds. He threatened the future of NATO. He endangered an ally in attempting to extort Ukraine in the middle of a hot war against Russia. And when it came to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump had nary a bad word to say during his presidency. These foreign policy moves were ill-advised in Cheney’s eyes, and it must raise the question: Can a party that went along with these decisions be trusted on national security any more than the Democrats whose positions she robustly denounces?
Cheney admitted that Republicans who won’t criticize Trump publicly give her a thumbs up behind closed doors. “The argument that, that you often hear is that if you do something that is perceived as against Trump that, you know, you’ll put yourself in political peril,” she explained. “And that’s a self-fulfilling prophecy because if Republican leaders don’t stand up and condemn what happened then, the voices in the party that are so dangerous will only get louder and stronger.”



Cheney continued: “When you look at the spread of these mistruths and the spread of the disinformation, you know, silence enables it. Silence enables the liar. And silence helps it to spread.” She warned, “So the first thing you have to do is say, ‘No. I’m not going to accept that we’re going to live in a post-truth world.’”
That raises a number of issues. Would she, for example, denounce Republican governors whose anti-covid mandates endanger thousands of children? Would she denounce measures intended to subvert elections by allowing partisan legislatures to displace nonpartisan election officials? And would she support changes to the Electoral Count Act that would prevent a coup as envisioned by Trump lawyer John Eastman? Questions about election subversion are especially critical given the phony “audits” underway and Trump’s insistence that the only elections that aren’t “rigged” are those he wins and those that are run by his cohorts.
Looking ahead, if Sen. Joe Manchin III’s (D-W.Va.) voting rights compromise fails, the defense of democracy may require some Republicans to cooperate with Democrats in passing anti-subversion legislation. On this, Cheney must be willing to confront the vote-manipulation legislation the GOP has justified by invoking the “big lie,” and she must be willing to put in guardrails to prevent another coup.



Cheney speaks truths few of her GOP colleagues have the nerve to declare. But her rhetorical courage must be accompanied by serious considerations as to whether her own party has defensible national security principles, whether she can in good conscience work for a GOP House majority, and whether she is willing to denounce other Republican lies. Ultimately, Cheney must help pass anti-insurrection and anti-rigging legislation if she really wants to drive a stake through a movement bent on undermining truth and undercutting democracy.

 
Liz could very well lose her seat in Congress
I think that's a pretty logical assumption.

and be well positioned to run for president in 2024.
I'd seriously consider voting for her, but she's in a pretty uncomfortable position right now. I don't think either the Dems or the GOP have any serious interest in her being the face of their party. She isn't going to last long as an independent, either.

She's a respectable politician, but her goose is cooked I'm afraid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I think that's a pretty logical assumption.


I'd seriously consider voting for her, but she's in a pretty uncomfortable position right now. I don't think either the Dems or the GOP have any serious interest in her being the face of their party. She isn't going to last long as an independent, either.

She's a respectable politician, but her goose is cooked I'm afraid.
Well it is obvious the GOP doesn't embrace respectable, unless it is female and underage.
 
I think that's a pretty logical assumption.


I'd seriously consider voting for her, but she's in a pretty uncomfortable position right now. I don't think either the Dems or the GOP have any serious interest in her being the face of their party. She isn't going to last long as an independent, either.

She's a respectable politician, but her goose is cooked I'm afraid.
In a perfect world the cult collapses, and someone like her who talked the truth is positioned to pick up the pieces.
 
ADVERTISEMENT